| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15731
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
 Posted: 06/19/20 11:37 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Well it's not a democracy at all and it never was. And you want to take a poll of those of you left here who kind of rule this board from one political perspective? How about if we award 20 votes each to a couple of posters here of my choosing? Because one political perspective is so underrepresented in this group. |
Umm, my reference to our society as a democracy was missed, apparently....but I was thinking of Area 51 as something of a free forum, where ideas could be identified, analyzed and debated. Apparently you feel the need to turn this forum into the United Posters of Jammerbirdi (You DO realize how *Trumpian* that seems, with the authoritarian declarations, right down to how you can skew your own polls, right??  )
Do you feel you must protect the "couple" of posters here cuz they're outnumbered? Poppycock. I remember being in the minority opinion here many times: show some guts and go after it....you learn to not take that first hit, 'n go die in a corner. It also reinforces your debating skills....You refine your ideas, and gather your sources and gain in articulation as you present your counterpoint.
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| And let me be very clear. THAT is Genero's intent. If it doesn't send a strong discouraging message to any of YOU it is because you AGREE with the content of these celebrity memes! |
I cannot comprehend the level of clairvoyance that enables you to discern his intent. Again, if anyone here feels "discouraged" by the memes I've seen from him, then....I don't know why they'd wanna be HERE, anyways.
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
Stop the memes. That's too damned easy and it becomes like a wall of thought from people who aren't here that we then have to consider and work around or through.
And that is also a form of trolling......
You want me to show you how that works in reality?
Here. You were involved. Glenn, responding to a meme by Genero.
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| Genero36 wrote: |
 |
That blurb is complete nonsense.
Those three judges didn't dissent because of bigotry. They all agree that equal treatment for LBGTQ is the correct policy, but they don't believe nine bubble-wrapped lawyers in Washington, D.C., should be making national policy on on this or any other important issue. Rather, their jurisprudential philosophy is that judges should stick to interpreting textual laws according to the commonly understood meaning of the textual words at the time of enactment.
They believe, on constitutional separation of powers principles, that such national policies should only be made by the elected branches of government, Congress and the President, by enacting clear laws that implement the policies. If Congress wanted the word "sex" in the Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation or psychological gender preference, which it clearly did not in 1964, then the constitutionally appropriate body to make such a legal change, as social mores change, is Congress. In fact, many such bills have been proposed in Congress recently, and about half the state legislatures have amended their state civil rights laws to cover sexual orientation and gender preference.
Citizens should learn something about basic civics and the constitution and stop slandering people with allegations of racism and bigotry. |
I don't know about this other stuff but I'm with Glenn on that point.
Here's Genero.
| Genero36 wrote: |
Howee
You certainly have more patience than I do because I don't bother to entertain those who use being willfully obtuse as an artform. |
|
I remember that exchange, and Justin aptly authored a counterpoint to what was implied by glenn. Genero was just expressing his frustration with a poster's post, who's no better at seeing beyond HIS own nose as he engenders his own politics. There were no nasty pejoratives.
One more thing to ponder, Jammer: it always serves us well to remain empathetic to the perspectives of others AND to gain in understanding how each and any of us might do things here that inhibit or diminish free speech from alternative viewpoints.
You imply that you (and others?) find Genero's memes and style intimidating to expression of variant opinions. *I* clearly remember many occasions when your pontifications on how life in the marvelous universe of California rendered the rest of us as incapable of comprehending The Reality of Life in America. That kind of 'oppression' you seem to want to wash away here actually takes many forms, and mere name-calling, memes and snarky pejoratives aren't the only ways that happens.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 1:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Of all the places to find myself living rent-free..._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66889
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 6:43 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Yeah, people can start threads. They're very easy to avoid. That's exactly what I'm suggesting. |
So this thread is to be moderated differently from other threads?
What reason would someone have to think that you won't come in and change the moderation rules on another thread too?
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 11:25 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Look I would be shocked at this point if there wasn't a chorus of voices here stepping up in support of Genero and his celebrity memes. |
I always thought Genero was a her, not a him. But I'm often wrong about such things. |
So did I, pilight. But the reason we often can be wrong about such things is perhaps because the number of genders has now magically increased from two to something like 32. At least according to woke science, which in my opinion is actually non-science or the intentional ignoring of science for political objectives.
And the biggest problem of all, on this site and all media and all public discussion generally -- other than Genero's excellent music threads -- is that virtually everything is overly politicized, including the crafting and analysis of legal opinions . . . and science itself.
That latter is because scientists, too, are overly politicized. What one mostly hears from scientists today in many important public debates is not empirical "science", but the politicized opinion of a human being who happens to have a diploma on his or her (x 16) wall with a science major on it. The same is true of doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs: much of what they utter is in all public debate is politicized, clientized or personally self-interested.
As to the larger points Jammer is making about the disappearance of classical liberal thought and expression in public debate generally and on this tiny microcosm board, I agree fully. Classic liberals not only welcomed differing and contrary opinions, but affirmatively sought them out and encouraged them, because that was believed to be the only way that one could become an intellectually and socially well-rounded citizen.
I don't know what to call most left wingers today other than left wingers. They certainly are not liberal. They seem to me to be narrow-minded, intolerant, cherry-picking in their use or understanding of science and law, trope-centric, and eternally offended or angry. And, saddest of all, seemingly unable to cope psychologically with opinions that differ from their woke indoctrinated party line. Literally. Unable. To. Cope.
I read all of Jammer's words and nothing on any social media, except when I unavoidably run across Twitter quotes in my research, but I feel his overarching concerns and hopes for this forum are unrealistically idealistic. I only began posting in Area 51 about six years ago, and originally only to explicate in as objective a manner as I could some complex Supreme Court cases, a field in which I have professional expertise. Then, regrettably, I also got sucked into the very intriguing cast of characters in the 2016 election.
But to be brutally honest, I never in that time have thought of this forum as one where serious discussions -- of the classical liberal or conservative kind -- could be had by any more than a handful of posters. Many of the participants here don't have the time, interest or perhaps experience to engage in serious, non-politicized, non-personal, extended debate. Too many are just hit-and-run posters who have nothing to say other than calling someone else (or their opinion) a curse word or some sort of "___ist" in a one sentence flame.
So, actually for all my sometimes words, I rarely engage anyone here in serious or sustained debate, and never plan to. It's not because I'm afraid or intimidated to do so. It's because I rarely see any possibility of serious intellectual discussion actually ensuing, and I have no interest in trading superficial political tropes or, more importantly, getting accidentally huffy with someone here whose knowledge of women's basketball I genuinely value.
Good luck in your efforts, Jammer. They are well-intentioned but perhaps too sensible for today's society in general, and in particular here.
As to the specific topic of this thread, social media quotes from politicized entertainers or other celebrities, I generally pay little attention to them here or on right or left wing blogs, where they are omnipresent. Such quotes either bore me with their expected repetitive superficiality, or just convince me that that celebrity has no more insight into the subject than any other man or woman (x 16) on on any street corner. However, the idea of concentrating them more often into one thread here, like the music topics, could be a more efficient and even effective use of them.
Last edited by GlennMacGrady on 06/20/20 11:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 11:27 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Yeah, people can start threads. They're very easy to avoid. That's exactly what I'm suggesting. |
So this thread is to be moderated differently from other threads?
What reason would someone have to think that you won't come in and change the moderation rules on another thread too? |
The reason anyone would or wouldn’t think whatever they might think or worry over about rule changes made on a whim or future authoritarian power grabs or whatever other fictional hypotheticals they imagine might happen here isn’t my concern at all.
Very practical and obvious solutions are available to this somewhat unique issue. We all avoid threads we're for whatever reason not interested in reading or experiencing. It’s very easy. A thread where someone can do something to his or her heart’s content is a practical solution to this particular problem.
Relentlessly and religiously doing something that is in my judgment tactical and as an administrator of this website who really cares about open conversations believes is intended to discourage open dialogues but whether that is the intent or NOT is having that effect, and doing that in virtually every thread we have on fraught controversial subjects is not avoidable.
Pretty much as an admin here over the years I’ve been a devoted user myself of this message board with my nose and heart in these threads and the discussions and so I have that level of perspective on what people are doing and the effect it has on me and if something is having an effect on me then it is not a leap to conclude that it will be impacting the conversations we might be having and even who might be inclined to join in on these so often now difficult subjects or even, taking it further, who might be inclined to visit here in Area 51 or participate in any way at all on this message board.
I’m trying and I will be trying to re-establish this place as somewhere where we can have the most open dialogues about subjects like politics and race. I want to protect that delicate capability from a trend that clearly exists everywhere now on social media and has been too much a part of the experience here of having someone, in some fashion or another, implying or overtly stating in what is now a myriad number of ways, that the expression of thoughts that fall outside a narrow boundary of their acceptable or allowable opinions are going to be met with a pushback that implies something deplorable and unacceptable about that commenter’s voicing that opinion. That could be that the opinion is racist and therefore the person offering that opinion is knowingly or unknowingly racist and/or knowingly or unknowingly trafficking in racist opinions or tropes.
None of this is that hard to understand.
Every situation or person here is different. Problems arise that require special handling. At this point with the age of this software and the lack of traffic and interest in Area 51 (not so bad at the moment) and the relatively few people we have over here at this point it is and has been very easy to say to myself, why bother? And I have often chosen not to bother. The err with me is always on the side of letting people do what they want. It has always seemed ridiculous to me for someone to be actively imposing behavioral standards over a group of other people. It just feels creepy. And that’s really at the heart of why I have wanted to do it. Because I feel it’s creepy and best done by someone who has that level of reservations about it to begin with.
People know me and what I’m about and the entire Rebkell’s message board reflects that. The message has always been consistent coming from me. Don’t personally attack each other is the most important and basic consideration. But I have learned over the years, and as I’m sure so many of you know, personal attacks can take many different forms and can be occurring on many different levels. And all of it can and does effect the overall atmosphere of this place and the quality of these all important conversations.
Because there are many different ways for people to establish and enforce rules in a social setting that have nothing to do with the establishment itself or the persons running it and how that is accomplished is through subtle or overt forms of what are still, basically, personal attacks. So that too is something I have to be cognizant of. And some people here have made that very easy for me by sticking the shit right in my face.
So we live now in an era of people enforcing their boundaries on what are allowable opinions and ideas through a real-world on-the-ground form of the politics of personal destruction. Social media, which we here are an early form of, is where that happens and the practice has long permeated this place. It is rooted in political correctness but has grown now to one of the greatest threats to free and wide ranging political speech we’ve ever seen in this country.
For some it may seem like the long overdue righting of traditional American wrongs. But that, as they say, is debatable. And that’s what this place is for. Debating this stuff on a granular level amongst ourselves. And that’s what I’m trying to not only protect but hopefully reinvigorate.
The emotionality of the pushback, the obfuscation and even gaslighting tells me that people are so accustomed to looking at things in this way that they’re either not really seeing or more likely not caring about the impact on the conversations here. Like I said, I think a lot of people have ended up with an Area 51 that caters to their ideas of what the boundaries are of acceptable conversation and thought.
I want to see a bigger and wider and more open conversation or at least make sure that we’re allowing for that to happen without bowing to the trends on other forms of social media where mobs have determined the acceptable boundaries of political discussion._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
sambista
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16951
Location: way station of life
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 1:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
genero posts a lot of things that i stop and look at and maybe read. and a lot of things i don't.
shades posts a lot of youtube videos that i stop and look at and maybe play. and a lot of them i don't.
some posters with small minds post a lot of small-minded crap that i just skip over.
jammerbirdi posts a lot of tomes that i almost never have time to stop and read, and because i come to rebkell's for escape and not homework or a lecture, rarely do i read them.
now it looks like i have no good reason to come here at all.
_________________
no justice, no peace.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 1:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| sambista wrote: |
genero posts a lot of things that i stop and look at and maybe read. and a lot of things i don't.
shades posts a lot of youtube videos that i stop and look at and maybe play. and a lot of them i don't.
some posters with small minds post a lot of small-minded crap that i just skip over.
jammerbirdi posts a lot of tomes that i almost never have time to stop and read, and because i come to rebkell's for escape and not homework or a lecture, rarely do i read them.
now it looks like i have no good reason to come here at all. |
How sad. And that’s because Genero would be putting all his celebrity memes in one thread?_________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 3:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| sambista wrote: |
genero posts a lot of things that i stop and look at and maybe read. and a lot of things i don't.
shades posts a lot of youtube videos that i stop and look at and maybe play. and a lot of them i don't.
some posters with small minds post a lot of small-minded crap that i just skip over.
jammerbirdi posts a lot of tomes that i almost never have time to stop and read, and because i come to rebkell's for escape and not homework or a lecture, rarely do i read them.
now it looks like i have no good reason to come here at all. |
How sad. And that’s because Genero would be putting all his celebrity memes in one thread? |
Why would they make sense in one thread? Just as sambista pointed out, would it make sense for Shades to post all of his YouTube videos in one thread? Or for other posters to put all of their thoughts in separate threads? Should each poster just have one thread they keep updated with their thoughts and musings on all subjects, sort of like how the WNBA section has one for each team? Because that is what you are singling Genero out to do, simply because you don't like the way he chooses to express his thoughts on the matter.
Genero communicates through memes and quotes for the most part. He uses them to respond to things posted by others or because they are on the topic of the thread he is posting in. Note that he similarly does this in the WNBA section as well.
Take Twitter and how people express their feelings there. There are many people who tweet tons of their own thoughts on matters left and right. They create threads that go on for 5,6, or even more posts regularly. And then there are other people that seldom Tweet their own words. They fill their timeline with the retweets of others because those words resonate with them. But make no mistake, if you go to their timeline you know exactly how they feel on a matter because of those retweets. They are communicating by picking and choosing the words that speak to them and sharing them with the world.
Another example from a different time would be the old making of a mixtape that you gave to your boyfriend/girlfriend/crush. I remember spending hours and hours trying to find the perfect songs that would encapsulate my feelings. And when we gave or recieved one, even though it was the words of another that was being shared, we knew that it spoke of our own thoughts and feelings.
But to tell Genero that he is has to adapt his preferred form of communication reeks of telling people to "learn proper English" when they speak in cultural dialects (like the way white people would disparage African-American culture by railing against "ebonics" or by calling cultural dialects "ghetto slang". Ultimately, there is a form of expression that you don't understand, and because it touches on celebrities which you hate with a passion, you have decided it's "divisive". But I have no clue how posting a quote from someone else, or me posting the words myself, makes one divisive and the other not. Either the words, thoughts, and feelings behind them are inappropriate and should be moderated, or they are not. The means of transmitting the idea doesn't somehow make an inappropriate thing appropriate, nor an acceptable post somehow unacceptable.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 3:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The first four paragraphs. Golden. Thank you SO MUCH for them. Response? This isn’t Twitter or a mixtape.
This last one? That hot mess is going to be my Saturday night and I thank you for it, too._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 3:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
TheThis isn’t Twitter or a mixtape.
This last one? That hot mess is going to be my Saturday night and I thank you for it, too. |
I'm not surprised that you don't see it. Understanding that different people communicate in different ways and being accepting of those ways and not trying to shoehorn people into a specific form of self-expression is one of the foundational concepts of post-colonial literature.
The fact that your response here is "it's not Twitter or a mixtape" tells me that you are so set on the rightness of your chosen form of communication and expression that you cannot fathom that the world has changed and has adopted new forms and methods. Which is what the Twitter example was: the way Genero is communicating here is not at all abnormal and is inherently valid.
But yet you keep coming back to it as if it were a liberal/conservative thing. Which makes no sense. I would be just as supportive of his right to communicate in such a way if he were posting and quoting conservative memes and celebrities.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 4:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Wow you're reaching far and wide and deep. Historical and racial and as if it's a liberal and conservative thing. I'll deal with all of that later.
But your 'preferred form of communication' thing reminded me of something. Just a funny and kind of related break in the action here before we get back to trying to purge my mind of unclean thoughts.
We used to have a poster here. Before your time. DivAAA. Loved DivAAA. DivAAA presented herself as a black woman but who knows. Could have been someone's alter-ego or a burner account that just took on a life of its own. Maybe even someone who's still here.
But DivAAA was a lot of fun in the threads for a long time. I think she alluded to the idea that she went back to the MSNBC days. Anyway, at some point, lol, DivAAA's preferred form of communication drifted into posting beefcake photos of semi-nude muscle men. Mostly men of color. BIG fucking pictures. Some of them were larger than our browsers or screens could handle. And they just somehow got progressively more semi-nude as this went on for... IDK... months.
I SEEM to remember them being contained in one thread. Not sure. But it didn't matter. Because over time the semi-nude dudes became semi-erect... I mean this became a big problem. And yeah, we struggled with what to do about it. For a long time, maybe too long, we were thinking that this was her thing, we pride ourselves on free speech, she had a right to use the message board the way she wanted. All that fucking nonsense.
But as the stuff got progressively more graphic we eventually reached out and told her that she had to stop.
My recollection is that she lost it. Went off on us and, of course, me especially. Said she was through with the place and stormed off. Anyway.
So yeah, I'll get back to you later on this other stuff and you can continue helping me to get the burning crosses out of my eyes.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 4:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
JIT, I get the feeling that Jammer would like this off-topic discussion forum to offer much more substantive discussion steak than Twitter sizzle. I buy into that, because I never read Twitter or Facebook unless it's quoted at me.
I also think Jammer is trying to encourage Genero to be more balanced in the use of social media clips. All good writers sometimes use supportive quotes, usually from truly famous people or experts. But if all one does is post a litany of social media quotes, then all that person is doing is demonstrating serial Google-fu.
Personally, I have no opinion whether Genero does this too much, because I have no interest in the political, scientific or legal opinions of Hollywood celebrities or entertainers. I tune them out and don't read them. Here, I am intentionally tuning in, and would value the opinions of the people here to whom I'm tuning in. For example, I love Genero's YouTube tributes in RIP threads for entertainers.
I do wish Genero would post a YouTube video giving a hint as to gender. I worry for this site if Pilight is confused. |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 4:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Jammer, your example was one of message, not medium. The issue wasn't that the poster chose to get across their ideas or express their thoughts through the words of others (or through picture of others), it was that the pictures they were posting crossed the line from acceptable for this forum to unacceptable.
For example, if I (or anyone) started posting pictures of myself that slowly became more and more risqué until the point where it crossed the line it would be treated the exact same as if I posted pictures of random people that became more and more risqué. There would be no distinction made because in one it is me and in the other it is someone else.
The same thing would seem to apply to words or ideas expressed here. If the content of my post doesn't cross any of the proscribed lines of Area 51, why should it matter whether those words and ideas belong originally to me, or whether they are someone else's that express my thoughts perfectly?
Much like the other poster, moderate what was said not the way it was said or who said it.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66889
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 4:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| sambista wrote: |
genero posts a lot of things that i stop and look at and maybe read. and a lot of things i don't.
shades posts a lot of youtube videos that i stop and look at and maybe play. and a lot of them i don't.
some posters with small minds post a lot of small-minded crap that i just skip over.
jammerbirdi posts a lot of tomes that i almost never have time to stop and read, and because i come to rebkell's for escape and not homework or a lecture, rarely do i read them.
now it looks like i have no good reason to come here at all. |
How sad. And that’s because Genero would be putting all his celebrity memes in one thread? |
Until you took an interest in the thread and told everyone not to post like that in the threads you read.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15731
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 5:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| But DivAAA was a lot of fun in the threads for a long time......But as the stuff got progressively more graphic we eventually reached out and told her that she had to stop. |
Your conflation of those 2 situations is absurd.
The current irony is that, imo, YOU were often the Great Dampener to real dialogue. I felt demeaned many times by your superior, "I Live in California and Seen It All" attitude. Or, "I'm from Aliquippa so I know all there is to know about The Working Class."
For me? Enough is enough. Frankly, jammer, I've seen enough of your recent bloviation here to feel genuine concern for your mental health: WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND DOES THIS? All this time spent in authoritarian bullying cuz you own this board, for a forum that is already dying? As a former poster usta say, "Drink some prune juice and let that shit go!". Seriously. Be well.
Meanwhile, you and glenn enjoy your mutual admiration society.
| sambista wrote: |
| now it looks like i have no good reason to come here at all. |
I hear ya, my friend. Area 51 was formerly an interesting diversion when the basketball season was done. Frankly, I'd rather see the semi-nudes than view what remains here.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
insidewinder
Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 240
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/20/20 7:28 pm ::: Ironically... |
Reply |
|
I see a post in this thread wherein someone calls "left wingers" intolerant, narrow-minded, unable to cope with other viewpoints, etc., etc. Basically insults people who post here. That gets to stay with no moderation yet someone who posts anything that is not in their own words is the problem? OK, got it. Well, I am no longer going to read this forum, and perhaps I should delete this site entirely. Nothing to gain on here anymore, really.
Good luck to those who stick it out. Seems to me the wise choice is to let the moderator have as little to moderate as possible.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 12:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
The fact that your response here is "it's not Twitter or a mixtape" tells me that you are so set on the rightness of your chosen form of communication and expression that you cannot fathom that the world has changed and has adopted new forms and methods.
|
You know some of us here, pilight, stever, me, luuuc, once (actually I think it was way more than once) used to debate which message board softwares best suited this community. Which platform or interface was better for the conversations and the user experience here. We were thinking about accessibility, flow, ability to respond and be seen. We all knew even back then how just the software we were using could impact whether we would have a successful message board community.
Everything about Twitter and big social media is different. There are billions of users. Anyone can respond to anyone. It is a format of short jab like 240 character stabs at ideas. It’s tailor made for people who don’t have a lot to say to have their say. There are likes and people very much express themselves through likes and retweeting things they either are amused by or agree with.
The atmosphere that is created by all that, the good and the bad, from toxic to harmless and amusing, abusive and destructive, and the cumulative effect of it all, the social media mobs... I know I'm prone to using superlatives, so look out.. but I'm going to say that it is unlike anything that’s ever existed in human history. There can be waves or trends that within mere hours reach a hue and cry that garners the attention of the largest companies and the world’s political leadership and that’s happening all the time, literally on a weekly basis.
Conversely, if you’re NOT thinking about THIS place and THESE conversations and threads as a now very small gathering YET online of anywhere from a handful up to a couple dozen people who have known each other for years, with a completely different function and utility in the online lives of those who would STILL decide to hang out on an old timey message board like this, then you’re thinking about this place the wrong way.
People decry the toxicity of Twitter all the time. Urge people to stay off of it. Put down their devices. Being a place online where people can have long form discussions without it being or devolving into what social media platforms like Twitter have become is what makes this place what it is. I still see that. If you don’t see that, don't have that level of understanding and appreciation for what this place is versus larger social media platform are, THAT is perfectly fine. It's okay. You don't have to. You only have to participate here and you only have to do that if you like what you find here in terms of content and company.
What I’m trying to do here is what I’ve been trying to do in this community for over 20 years. I’m trying to protect the ability of people to have conversations, say what they want to say, in a place where they feel safe in doing that. Safe means being able to participate without fear of being abused or damaged in any way for expressing their opinions here. Never ever wavered or changed my attitude towards my role in doing that here. And let me tell you, it has always BEEN a struggle.
As I don’t have to point out to the smart folks here. There is a huge trend on social media and on the political landscape at large that threatens people’s ability to have open and frank conversations now by attaching toxic labels to anyone whose thoughts and opinions stray into areas that are deemed by large and loud groups that now with almost alarming regularity are calling for the heads or careers of someone who has dared to say something they don't like. Homophobic, sexist, xenophobic, etc.
But the most damaging label that anyone can have attached to their existence on this planet is RACIST.
Now, I’m asking everyone here who is reading this and weighing in on this conversation here now... PLEASE... stop pretending like you don’t know anything about this. Just stop. lol.
Because it's been happening here for years. It's happened to me.
So how did we get here?
MEMES can be fabulously entertaining, but they are also incredibly powerful often coded shorthand that conveys information or opinion or condemnation in one succinct blow. Images, gif, short videos. All of this stuff is now so often loaded with a message.
So let me describe one incident here that clarified FOR ME the problem and the impact it could have on conversations here in this community when someone decides to deploy this stuff into threads wherein they don't like what's being said.
2016 probably. We're having a discussion about immigration. Usual suspects including me. Anyone who's read this board over the years knows I hold opinions on the issue of immigration that are my own. For a person coming from the left, they stray from what is considered acceptable progressive thought. But there's no malice in my heart. I'm talking about impacts, etc. Good and bad.
A poster here quotes a thought of mine and embeds a short video from YouTube in response. No words of his own. Just the video. It was of a cross burning.
People know what I do here. Certainly he did. Over the years I've demonstrated that you can come at me here on this board and even get personal and I'm not going to throw you off because I can't. And I didn't throw that dude off. My thoughts there are we're getting into heated discussions all the time. I want those heated discussions to happen like a guy who runs a bar wants to sell liquor. I don't want to do anything that threatens that atmosphere so I have never felt that it would work to throw people off the board for doing the same things to me that I forbid them to do to others.
So people have taken advantage of that.
But if someone was okay with attaching a burning cross video to something I was saying about immigration, what would they be doing across the board without me here or someone who thinks like me about this place and how it should work? So that incident opened my eyes to how far some people here were willing to go to quell conversations that they found to be politically unacceptable.
So let's examine what that has to do with what just happened here these last few days and stick a pin in that part about quelling conversations.
A few days ago in the Rayshard Brooks thread I posted a typically long winded diatribe that made the case on a granular level that Mr. Brooks ultimately ended up dead because of the degree to which he violently resisted arrest. I won't go into all that again. I asked questions about the laws down there because I DO genuinely question how and why police interact with people who are suspected of drunk driving in all its forms and permutations and I have deep reservations about how the police would and should deal with people who are passed out and not moving. I had a fucking website about all this in the fucking 90s that talked about how police PROCEDURES... what we ASSIGN and DEMAND and PAY police officers to do on our behalf needs to change. I featured the shooting of a black teenage girl down in I think Riverside County who was passed out behind the wheel of her car, which was parked and running, and was shot to death by officers where she sat. SHE NEVER EVEN WOKE UP! She was still asleep when they unloaded on her.
So this is who I am. Police killings of black people was so much a thing for me that I made a website about it.
The problem is that nobody... but... NOBODY... here. Gives a shit about who I am or what I've said or done in the past.
Because right now I'm talking in exhaustive detail about an aspect of this latest incident and I'm digging at an idea that they don't like. That Mr. Brooks should not have gotten violent with the police officers there just doing the jobs they are assigned to do.
The very next post after mine was by Genero and it's a meme that The Daily Show/Trevor Noah posted on Twitter. It is a list of racist tropes and at the top of the list is the idea that resisting arrest should be any sort of a factor in the death of a black man. And I had just posted a very long drawn out examination and assertion of that very thing.
And the immediate response is a celebrity meme that says that THAT thought or opinion is a racist trope.
The reason that was posted was because it was a PERFECT response to what I'd just written here on the board. It expressed PERFECTLY the fact that Genero was displeased that I'd written such things here. And it expressed with PERFECTION the idea that I was expressing a racist take on the death of this man at the hands of police. And it was endorsed by one of our leading celebrity political thought leaders of the day.
So I don't want to get into that, but if YOU really think that's not a powerful thing these days, that what Trevor Noah says doesn't carry a massive amount of weight in this present day political culture, then you've probably never heard of John Stewart.
My opinion is that this is done with the intention to quell a conversation here that had strayed into an area that someone didn't want to see examined to the detailed and reasoned degree that it was. The idea was being seriously taken and presented here by someone.
But a response to the idea that punching a cop and taking his taser away from him and firing at him might lead to that person's demise is NOT, I would suggest, an easy argument to make. Genero didn't bother even trying. He never does. He used a celebrity meme that basically accuses anyone examining or suggesting that possibility of trafficking in racist tropes. Similar accusations are now flying around this place all the time.
Look. I'm both a user here and an admin. I experience things as others do and I can then use those experiences to help inform my thinking. It's probably a good thing for the matter of free speech here that I hold some positions outside of the approved woke dogma. Because I experience something different than do people who are all sitting around this message board in agreement with each other.
I don't think you guys are aware of what the overall effect of some of the stuff that goes on here as a matter of routine. I hate to use terms from the woke lexicon but the micro-aggressions never really stop. I only grabbed onto one yesterday from Matty to make that point. Thank you, Matty. Your timing was perfect.
So on the question of people leaving. Look, there's not a lot of people left here in this group. I don't want people to leave. But if a dozen people are leaving here BECAUSE of this? Then that means that those are people who either don't get what I'm saying (I don't believe that for a minute but I'm kind of obligated to allow for it) or are REALLY themselves fully down with the idea of crushing other people's viewpoints when they don't agree with them.
I don't know what will come after you guys leave. I would hope it's a group that WANTS to respect all viewpoints and is willing to engage and is not looking to ascribe to those they disagree with the worst motives and most toxic labels and all that other stuff in order to just shut down conversations they don't want people to have. Because I'm going to be protecting free speech on Rebkell's from what I and many others believe is one of the great threats to it we've ever seen in this country.
Good luck, best of health to everyone, and I hope we all get to the many places we want to be._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
Last edited by jammerbirdi on 06/21/20 2:59 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66889
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 2:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ghod, jammer, you must be the only person in the world who prefers 1000 words to a picture
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 3:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Ghod, jammer, you must be the only person in the world who prefers 1000 words to a picture |
Good one, pilight. But we shouldn’t forget that every picture now is made up of millions of ones and zeroes. It’s all in how they’re put together._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21925
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 6:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
The problem is that nobody... but... NOBODY... here. Gives a shit about who I am or what I've said or done in the past.
Because right now I'm talking in exhaustive detail about an aspect of this latest incident and I'm digging at an idea that they don't like. That Mr. Brooks should not have gotten violent with the police officers there just doing the jobs they are assigned to do. |
Has anybody said or implied disagreement with this, or is this a strawman?
Asserting that someone has no business getting physical and trying to escape from people just doing their job is not the same as asserting that someone deserves to die if they do try it. If I was one of the "they" that you are aiming this strawman at then I'd immediately assume you weren't arguing in good faith. It's pretty easy to see why meme-type responses get deployed.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 8:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Luuuc wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
The problem is that nobody... but... NOBODY... here. Gives a shit about who I am or what I've said or done in the past.
Because right now I'm talking in exhaustive detail about an aspect of this latest incident and I'm digging at an idea that they don't like. That Mr. Brooks should not have gotten violent with the police officers there just doing the jobs they are assigned to do. |
Has anybody said or implied disagreement with this, or is this a huge strawman?
Asserting that someone has no business getting physical and trying to escape from people just doing their job is not the same as asserting that someone deserves to die if they do try it. If I was one of the "they" that you are aiming this strawman at then I'd immediately assume you weren't arguing in good faith. It's pretty easy to see why meme-type responses get deployed. |
First yeah, the precise thought I was trying to express there where you have bolded may have gotten away from me. I’m quite sure that exact point as written is something most everyone is in agreement on. So good one. Sloppy writing by me.
But second, where did I ever ‘ASSERT that someone DESERVES to die’ if they do? Maybe I did that too but I’d like you to show me. Or did you just post a carelessly worded thought?
I said in that original post that I didn’t think the murder charges against the police were warranted. I have asserted that the degree to which this person violently resisted arrest should carry with it the expectation that that person might be killed. But I don’t even think the cops should be trying to arrest people in those situations. We really have to do things differently or we’re going to destroy policing in this country and what comes after that will be the destruction of the US itself.
I contend that the meme was deployed in response to someone having the temerity on this message board to open the thorny subject of physically resisting a police officer and the expectation that that could result in the death of the citizen. The meme said that thinking those thoughts and discussing them is trafficking in racist tropes.
That’s Trevor Noah’s opinion. If it’s the opinion of someone here, SAY it and let’s have that discussion. This is a message board. We talk about these things. Or we should be. Can anyone go back and read my original post and find something there to discuss with me? Anyone want to go on the record saying that guy shouldn’t have punched the cop in the face and stolen his taser and fired it at the cop and if he hadn’t done those things that that he would still be alive?
In other words, according to Trevor Noah, traffic along with me in a racist trope. How about basically No, nope, not a chance, I’ll take a pass on that, jammer.
Again, let no one here pretend that sharing political opinions that fall outside of the approved progressive woke narrative is NOT resulting in personal and professional destruction now with amazing frequency. This is political correctness in 2020. Cancel culture has become the greatest threat to free speech in any of our lifetimes. Our own powerful mainstream media bows to it in fear.
Is the meme right or is the meme wrong? Was I trafficking in a racist trope or was I having a perfectly acceptable conversation with myself online? Was the meme intended as a response by Genero to what I had posted? I’d like some answers to those questions. From anyone._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21925
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 9:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Luuuc wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
The problem is that nobody... but... NOBODY... here. Gives a shit about who I am or what I've said or done in the past.
Because right now I'm talking in exhaustive detail about an aspect of this latest incident and I'm digging at an idea that they don't like. That Mr. Brooks should not have gotten violent with the police officers there just doing the jobs they are assigned to do. |
Has anybody said or implied disagreement with this, or is this a huge strawman?
Asserting that someone has no business getting physical and trying to escape from people just doing their job is not the same as asserting that someone deserves to die if they do try it. If I was one of the "they" that you are aiming this strawman at then I'd immediately assume you weren't arguing in good faith. It's pretty easy to see why meme-type responses get deployed. |
First yeah, the precise thought I was trying to express there where you have bolded may have gotten away from me. I’m quite sure that exact point as written is something most everyone is in agreement on. So good one. Sloppy writing by me.
But second, where did I ever ‘ASSERT that someone DESERVES to die’ if they do? Maybe I did that too but I’d like you to show me. Or did you just post a carelessly worded thought? |
I didn't say you asserted that. Where did I say that?
I'm saying that, as far as I am aware, the predominant sentiment seems to be simply that being shot dead is not an appropriate punishment for trying to escape.
Whether someone *should* be trying to escape in that situation and in that manner is a completely separate argument, which as far as I'm concerned is quite fine to discuss on its own merits. But it is not ok to assume that because people don't think someone should be killed for running, they also must think it's fine to attack police.
The point of view of the meme is another thing again.
Personally I think that there are few people better able - when it comes to personal experience, smarts, and ability to express themselves - to speak on racial issues than Trevor Noah.
I don't think highly of that particular meme. Which could be because it's a shitty meme, or it could also be because I just don't get it. The latter is something I'm open to when I consider the source and his track record.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 10:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Luuuc wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Luuuc wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
The problem is that nobody... but... NOBODY... here. Gives a shit about who I am or what I've said or done in the past.
Because right now I'm talking in exhaustive detail about an aspect of this latest incident and I'm digging at an idea that they don't like. That Mr. Brooks should not have gotten violent with the police officers there just doing the jobs they are assigned to do. |
Has anybody said or implied disagreement with this, or is this a huge strawman?
Asserting that someone has no business getting physical and trying to escape from people just doing their job is not the same as asserting that someone deserves to die if they do try it. If I was one of the "they" that you are aiming this strawman at then I'd immediately assume you weren't arguing in good faith. It's pretty easy to see why meme-type responses get deployed. |
First yeah, the precise thought I was trying to express there where you have bolded may have gotten away from me. I’m quite sure that exact point as written is something most everyone is in agreement on. So good one. Sloppy writing by me.
But second, where did I ever ‘ASSERT that someone DESERVES to die’ if they do? Maybe I did that too but I’d like you to show me. Or did you just post a carelessly worded thought? |
I didn't say you asserted that. Where did I say that?
I'm saying that, as far as I am aware, the predominant sentiment seems to be simply that being shot dead is not an appropriate punishment for trying to escape. |
Well this is the conversation I set out to have. Thank you. I already balked at the language here. Appropriate punishment? Like someone was sitting back coolly deciding what the appropriate punishment should be? The cops had no idea at that point whether what they were doing was going to be judged to be appropriate or not. They had just been and really still were fighting for their own lives! They weren't punishing the guy. So why is it okay to even say that, Luuuc? Please tell me that.
| Luuuc wrote: |
| Whether someone *should* be trying to escape in that situation and in that manner is a completely separate argument, which as far as I'm concerned is quite fine to discuss on its own merits. But it is not ok to assume that because people don't think someone should be killed for running, they also must think it's fine to attack police. |
Point conceded, Luuuc.
| Luuuc wrote: |
The point of view of the meme is another thing again.
Personally I think that there are few people better able - when it comes to personal experience, smarts, and ability to express themselves - to speak on racial issues than Trevor Noah.
I don't think highly of that particular meme. Which could be because it's a shitty meme, or it could also be because I just don't get it. The latter is something I'm open to when I consider the source and his track record. |
I think we need to talk about the elephant in the room. Are we going to let people here push back at posters on Rebkell's who are trying to express against the grain contrarian thoughts (and not just for the fun of it) by employing the same tactics of personal destruction that have blown up like wildfire on other social media platforms? It's the WAY memes are being used here and the intent behind them and the effect, the DESIRED effect, that they would have on the atmosphere of open and wide ranging opinion sharing that we should both want to get back to and protect.
Others can certainly weigh in but that's the discussion you and I need to have.
You want memes in every thread? Fine. But once one of them is utilized in a way that I can judge to be a push back against what is being discussed in that thread by members of the Rebkell's community then I'm going to have a problem with that. I don't want people taking their time and effort to compose their thoughts and work out their logic and marshall the guts to post them here and then to have another poster counter those thoughts with what Kathy fucking Griffin thinks about shit.
But when someone uses a meme or a gif or video to suggest that a sincere poster here with no malice in his or her heart who is just discussing angles of stories is trafficking in racism then I will DIE ON THE HILL of putting a stop to that. This place has drifted there and we're going to drift it back the other way._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21045
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 10:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EapWRy-6C3o" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>_________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 06/21/20 11:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
It's the WAY memes are being used here and the intent behind them and the effect, the DESIRED effect, that they would have on the atmosphere of open and wide ranging opinion sharing that we both want to get back to and protect.
Others can certainly weigh in but that's the discussion that you and I need to have. |
Is the meme trolling/attacking another poster in a way that we wouldn't allow if they had used paragraph form?
Or is the meme expressing a poster's feelings on a matter.
If it's the first, it should be handled exactly the same way we handle all trolling/personal attacks. Of course, perhaps before we go after memes we should better define what it is and isn't considered trolling/attacks and what the consequences will be for said actions rather than making the posters here kind of play "guess the mod's mood". For instance, if we don't want people calling each other racists, define that as a personal attack. And then we can moderate it. And if someone posts a meme of a burning cross directed at another poster suggesting they are racist...well they just violated the rule. And if someone is being outright racist, then it falls on the mods to take action.
But if it's the second, and the meme or quote is expressing someone's feelings on a matter, then shutting them down just because of the form it's presented in runs counter to the idea of an open community.
I get that memes and quotes can be annoying, and I too prefer a back and forth dialogue/debate. But I'm also self-aware enough to know that I surely rub some people here the wrong way with my posting style, and I'm sure my inability to turn off teacher mode at times, or the fact that I will debate a subject to death can be just as annoying as memes. Different people will respond to different things. And as long as it expresses and idea and isn't a personal attack, so be it. If something has gotten to be too much for me, I'll just skip it. As I'm sure people do with my posts when I get to be too much for them.
And make no mistake, just because someone uses paragraphs or their own words doesn't mean they are going to engage in a debate. There are many posters who hit a topic with their thoughts and then never engage again. Whether they used words, a quote, or a meme to express their thoughts or feelings on a subject is pretty much a distinction without a difference.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
|
|
